Deion Sanders: (Synopsis) - White guys CAN run!

Submitted by boliver46 on

Interesting story in the vein of the Good White Guy Basketball Player theme: "Not Just a Shooter"...

Troy Apke is turning heads at the combine, with a 4.35 40-yard Dash (along with a 41 inch vertical).

Deion Sanders was impressed, but couldn't tell you exactly WHY he was so impressed:

“Oh man, he can run,” Sanders said, stopping the conversation he was having with NFL Network analysts Mike Mayock and Rich Eisen.  “Why are you surprised Deion?” Mayock joked. “You know why I’m surprised. I can’t say it on TV. But he can run run,” Sanders said.  Yes, that’s (presumably) a joke about Apke being white and running fast.  “You don’t see that much. Let’s call it what it is,” Sanders said.

 

 

Along with some of the comments made yesterday about the guy from UCF with one hand, the commentary by some of these talking heads makes me shake my head.

Link

Mack Tandonio

March 6th, 2018 at 12:48 PM ^

You're probably not offended because your race has never hurt you. That's okay and it's a good thing. People come up with chips on their shoulders about almost anything from living up to standards set by older siblings or being too short. In every case we just try to respect people's sensitivities, and almost nobody is sensitive about being white. The standards are different for everyone, that's just the way it is.

MeanJoe07

March 6th, 2018 at 1:41 PM ^

Nope. Respect must be earned.  I'm neutral on all people until they give me a reason to respect or not respect them.  Sure I try to be a nice koala in general to everyone, but that doesn't mean I respect them or have to respect whatever weird sensitivity they have.  Why should I give two tugs of a dead dog's dick what race you are or what your sensitive about.  Are you a good person? Do you have a positive impact on society as a whole? Race doesn't hurt people.  Stupid people who think they can apply broadly certain characteristics of a race whether they're true or not to an individual are hurtful. 

MeanJoe07

March 6th, 2018 at 4:31 PM ^

The subconscience can't be observed or tested and has never been proven to exist since that would be impossible by its very definiton.  It's simply an untestable theory. Unconscience bias is basically the "orginal sin" of the athiests.  

I took the test. it involves matching words and pictures with good/bad associations and measures how fast you respond with your right or left hand.  Measuring how fast I can sort things as good or bad seems like a made-up way to measure bias.  

Also bias is an unfair preference of one thing over another.  How are they defining "unfair"?  couldnt some prefeences of one thing over another be fair?  What set of standards are they using for "good" and "bad" because that can also vary person to person.  Poorly designed test in my opinion.  Those that are surprised by this test are probably biased toward believing online tests are true.  

Gulogulo37

March 6th, 2018 at 7:24 PM ^

False. MRIs and other brain imaging technology don't just measure your conscious brain activity.

We know for a fact that even if you don't consciously notice something in your field of vision, it's still getting picked up by rods and cones and your optic nerve and then the primary visual cortex.

MeanJoe07

March 8th, 2018 at 12:00 PM ^

Oooo you got me!  I mean the the unconscience in the Freuding sense.  Obviously you can observe your heart beating and it's not something you have to think about or notice. I'm talking about "unconscience bias" as in thoughts or feelings you have in your head that you're not aware of.  Like you secretly hate redheads.  In your conscience mind you think nothing of it, but you have weird dreams of killing redheads and you keep triupping them on  the street by accident.  and Yes you can certainly see your brain signals etc. but you cannot look at a brain and observe these thoughts and differentiate them from conscious ones.  

ironmind

March 7th, 2018 at 12:40 AM ^

If there's one thing I've learned about humans it's that culture determines how you're perceived more than skin color over the last 20 years or so.

Urban culture, the "wanna be rapper with a mix tape," is doing no favors for young men and women regardless of their race these days. Same with the confederate flag in Michigan hillbillies.

kevbo1

March 6th, 2018 at 12:47 PM ^

And people should not take offense to similar comments about other groups of people. In the days of "outrage" I long for the days where you could call me a honkie and we could just have a good laugh about it and go on with our day.

Fishbulb

March 6th, 2018 at 1:51 PM ^

...Collinsworth, Warner, or Romo had the same reaction about a minority prospect who had a very high Wonderlic score? Sanders should not have gone there.

Erik_in_Dayton

March 6th, 2018 at 3:08 PM ^

That is an accurate statement.  Sanders doesn't deserve scorn for saying something that is true.  This would be a different story if Sanders had claimed that the clock must have been wrong because the time didn't match up with his expectations, but he didn't do that.  He acknowledged that Apke is fast.

Hard-Baughlls

March 6th, 2018 at 3:41 PM ^

Can't we just do a spreadsheet of guys that have run a sub 4.5 or sub 4.4 at the combines over the past decade and see that they are disproportionately black?

Can't we look at Olympic sprinters and see that the fastest runners in the world come from island nations in the Caribbean (Jamaica, Barbados, etc) or the US and are decendents of slaves of western Africa - that were often forced to breed (a disgusting practice) based on taking the strongest and fastest slaves and matching them?

Denying the science of genetics and inheritted trates is stupid.  People from different regions look different and have often evolved in different ways due to both the environment and forced procreation (eugenics).  

The idea of race is stupid and outdated because it is focused primarily on skin color, and it is VERY dangerous to try to apply these standards to categories such as intelligence, creativity, psychology or traits intrinsic to human behavior.

But saying "the average Swedish person is taller than the average Japanes person" is simply a statistic, not racist. Social justice warriors need to chill and realize certain battles are not worth it and often just based on "OUTRAGE" instead of actual analysis of the claims.

Deion said nothing that a scientific study probably wouldn't support - just based on outcomes.  

BlueWolverine02

March 6th, 2018 at 5:42 PM ^

yep, it has nothing to do with the color of skin, it has to do with the fact that individuals of West African descent have, on average, bigger glutes and a bigger limb to torso length ratio. both of these lead to running faster.

Gulogulo37

March 6th, 2018 at 6:39 PM ^

I don't know much about the topic but apparently many researchers now think Africans have more genetic diversity than others (not sure how groups were split), which makes a lot of sense given the out of Africa theory. That could lead to a subset that's fast that doesn't particularly reflect black people as a whole. Not saying what you said is false at all, but just adding one more thing to think about when it comes to genetic explanations.

MeanJoe07

March 6th, 2018 at 5:52 PM ^

What are the odds that height and speed are determined by genetics, but not things like intelligence? Most studies show heritability of IQ is between 58% and 77% and maybe even as high as 80+%.   Your okay with sayin people X are taller than group Y and thats facts and not racist.  What if I said started saying similar things about IQ. Would that be racist? 

MeanJoe07

March 6th, 2018 at 6:30 PM ^

Verbal Intelligence, Mathematical Ability, Spatial Reasoning, Visual/Perceptual Skills, Classification Skills, Logical Reasoning, and Pattern Recognition are all pretty measurable and definable. Could we say one group on average evolved in an area on earth where intelligence gave them a better chance to survive than speed or visa versa? Are we just more sensitive about intelligence than we are quad muscles and therefore cant accept reality? I have no idea. It just seems like we have no problem discussing physical attributes, but mental is suddenly different even though the brain is also just an organ.

Gulogulo37

March 6th, 2018 at 7:00 PM ^

You really don't see a big difference between the complexity of the brain and other organs or quad muscles? But yes, people are more sensitive to differences in intelligence and there's good reason for that.

A while ago, Brian ripped Charles Murray on Twitter and I saw a bunch of replies telling him he should check out the interview with Sam Harris. I'm willing to listen to things from a rational and scientific perspective, but the fact that Sam Harris had him on for like 2 hours (don't remember exactly but it was long) and never brought up any rational critiques of Charles Murray and instead just had a pity party for him getting harrassed was maddening.

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2017/5/18/15655638/charles-murray-race…

MeanJoe07

March 8th, 2018 at 11:48 AM ^

I didn't say they weren't different.  Anybody with a pulse can tell you how a brain is different than a quad muscle.  That fact that they are different has nothing to do with the yes/no question of "is it affected by gentics? Yes or No"  of which the answer is "yes".  That is what I was saying.  People from who evolved from a specific area of the world have particularly large quad muscles.  Does this mean that quad size isnt affected by nutrition or other factors?  No.  Perhaps people from certain areas have higher IQs?  Does this mean that IQ isnt affected by other factors such as nutrition, early childhood environment, etc?  No.  The fact that almost everything in life is really nuanced is not lost on me.  We don't know to what degree most traits are heritable, we just know that they are to some degree. IQ anywhere from 60 to 80%  That leaves 40 to 20% which is a lot left over for other factors.  Looking at race can get dicey because within races such as "black"  there is so much genetic variation.  Africa is incredibly diverse so lumping "dark skinned" people into one group and saying "well they're all this way" is incredibly stupid and even more stupid on an individual level.  This doesn't mean gentics and where you come from has no affect.  We can all talk about quad muscles, but as soon as we mention the brain and even suggest the THEORY that MAYBE  some people from any group (but especially if they are a minority) might be smarter or dumber on average partially due to genetics, everyone loses their mind.  I get it . . . racism and all that so people are sensitive.  But it's awlays better when we can have honest conversations that are not clouded by our feelings and sensitivities. I don't think we're there quite yet.

Erik_in_Dayton

March 6th, 2018 at 7:20 PM ^

We’re getting closer to being able to test intelligence if we narrow what we mean down in the way you have. But it still seems to me much harder to weed out environmental factors that lead to results on a math test than it is to weed out environmental factors that lead to results in a sprint.

As for people being sensitive re: intelligence, we are a society that values intelligence a great deal and that at times equates intelligence with overall value as a person. It’s true that Group X having a higher average IQ than Group Y would not logically mean that any given person from X has a higher IQ than any given person from Y. But a lot of people are lazy thinkers who would draw that conclusion anyway.

greatlakestate

March 6th, 2018 at 8:09 PM ^

  It's important to note that they way we typically define intelligence (IQ test) doesn't really measure only innate ability. And they weren't designed to do that anyway.  They were designed to predict school success and they do that pretty well.  Kids who come from stable, middle class homes with books and experiences do better on the tests and also do better in the classroom.  But that doesn't mean poor and minority kids are innately less intelligent.

MeanJoe07

March 8th, 2018 at 11:24 AM ^

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S01602896070002

Conscientiousness is the greatest predictor of success in school.  Higher than IQ. IQ is actually not as correlated to GPA.  I would agree that poor and minority kids (except for Asians and Jews on average) are often told and expected to do poorly for a variety of reasons and then that's exactly what they do. Even if they have a high IQ it's stifled because the culture they're part of and/or their peers do not value education and they aren't aware of the opportunities and growth they could achieve.  That said, I think high IQ individuals tend to make more money and marry other higher IQ individuals and have higher IQ babies brought up in evironments that value education.  IQ doesn't change much over your life and it kind of is what it is.  there is some evidence that it can be increases by different factors very early in life, but you can't really increase your IQ much more than a few points if your lucky by studying.  

MeanJoe07

March 8th, 2018 at 11:11 AM ^

Good point. Yea it's important folks understand statistics and the difference between studying averages of large groups vs. looking at an individual.  It's hard enough to find causation for characteristics when looking at a group. Extrapolating that to an individual is almost impossible.  I would argue that intelligence does not = worth of an individual. There's a lot of really shitty worthless smart people. Give me a hard working, moral, and caring "stupid" guy any day over a shitty smart person. 

MotleyBlue

March 6th, 2018 at 6:28 PM ^

But I know tons of slow white guys! Some of them are my best friends! Ive even had them over to my house!

/s

lets keep it fun in here guys